Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 418 S.W.2d 504 - Brunson v. State

Brunson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
November 2010
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 2010

13 state decisions

40196719701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Texas Power & Light Company v. Cole · Odum v. Rutledge & Julian Railroad · Thompson v. Orange & Rockland Electric Co. · Heyert v. Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc. · Hopkins v. Cravey

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A]n easement is a nonpossessory interest, though it authorizes its holder to use the property for a particular purpose. While establishment of an easement, in general terms, implies a grant of unlimited reasonable use as is reasonably necessary and convenient, the fee owner retains title to the land and all that is ordinarily considered part of that land.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “But it should be the burden of the condemning authority to have its judgment speak expressly of special arrangements in the easement taking; otherwise, the ownership of the landowner in improvements which are a part of the realty, and his right to remove them, will be enforced.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “the easement thus acquired carried with it the right of the State to remove any improvements on the land that would interfere with the full and beneficial use of the easement rights but did not take away the subsisting ownership of the landowner in the improvements and his right to remove them,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.